18.aba.15.2022 ORDER.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 15 OF 2022

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2022

Mansing Vijay Bondre

...Applicant

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2022

Abhishek Chandrakant alias Subhash

Bondre

...Applicant

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

-------------------

Mr. Aniket Nikam I.by Mr. Amit Icham for the applicants.

Ms.A.S. Pai- PP for the State.

Mr. Kunal Bhange – Intervenor.

---------------------

CORAM : C.V.BHADANG, J

DATED :12TH JANUARY 2022.

(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant, apprehending his arrest

in connection with investigation of Crime No. 601 of 2021 of police

station Juna Rajwada, Kolhapur under section 307 and 506 of Indian

Penal Code and under Section 3/ 25, 5/27 of Arms Act, is seeking

varsha

1 of 7

VARSHA

DEEPAK

GAIKWAD

Digitally

signed by

VARSHA

DEEPAK

GAIKWAD

Date:

2022.01.14

16:54:33

+0530

18.aba.15.2022 ORDER.doc

Anticipatory Bail.

2.

The prosecution case, as disclosed from the complaint

lodged by Abhishek Bondre is that there is a dispute between the

family of the informant and that of the applicant. The informant is the

cousin brother of the applicant. The dispute is on account of

educational institution which was established by the grandfather of the

informant and the applicant as also some landed property.

3.

On 13^th December 2021 at about 12.30 a.m. the applicant

is alleged to have gone in a Fortuner Car near the house of the

applicant. It is the material case that when the informant came out

from the rear gate of the compound, the applicant threatened the

informant with life and thereafter fired a shot from a revolver which

missed the informant. Thereafter, the informant alongwith his mother

and wife confined themselves to the house fearing danger to their life

and limb.

4.

It appears that there was a video of the firing recorded

which according to the informant was uploaded on the social media,

by the applicant, which has subsequently been deleted. The informant

gathered courage and lodged the complaint with Juna Rajwada Police

Station at about 4.00 p.m. on 14^th December 2021, on the basis of

which the aforesaid offence came to be registered which is under

investigation.

5.

The learned Sessions judge by an order dated 23^rd

varsha

2 of 7

18.aba.15.2022 ORDER.doc

December 2021 has refused to grant anticipatory bail application to

the applicant.

6.

I have heard, Mr. Nikam, the learned counsel for the

applicant and Ms. Pai, learned PP for the State. I have also heard Mr.

Kunal Bhange, the learned counsel for the informant/intervenor.

7.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that

the applicant had tired certain shots from the revolver of the co-

accused, as a matter of entertainment, which would be evident from

the fact that the video recording of the said firing was made with a

background music.

8.

It is submitted that, had the applicant made an attempt on

the life of the informant, the incident of firing could not have been

recorded in a video which was said to be circulated on the social

media. The learned counsel strenuously urged that on the basis of the

CDR of the informant and his mother, it would be evident that the

informant or his family members were not in their house on the date

and time of alleged incident. The learned counsel fairly submitted that

although the act of the applicant firing the shots in the air as a matter

of entertainment cannot be approved, it is submitted that there was no

incident of any attempt on the life of the informant.

9.

It is submitted that the informant is taking undue

advantage of the said incident being recorded and put on the social

media to implicate the applicant on account of family dispute between

varsha

3 of 7

18.aba.15.2022 ORDER.doc

them. He submitted that the video recording of the incident has been

handed over